Lodestar Method

957 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 111 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Craig v. Sec'y, Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  864 F.2d 324· 4th Cir.· 1989-01-03 ·cited 17×·via Lodestar Fee Calculation
  The court held that while contingency and delay can justify fee enhancement in social security cases, the lower court failed to adequately explain its reasoning and calculations for the awarded fee.
• First State Ins. Co. v. Gen. Elec. Credit Auto Lease, Inc.
  518 So. 2d 927· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-12-15 ·cited 17×
  First State Insurance Company appealed a summary judgment finding that it provided excess insurance coverage to General Electric Credit Auto Lease, Inc. The court affirmed, holding that the insurance policy's ambiguous excess coverage provisions could be clarified through parol e
• Kenny A. v. Sonny Perdue
  532 F.3d 1209· 11th Cir.· 2008-07-03 ·cited 16×
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding enhanced attorney's fees. Enhancements for quality of representation and exceptional results are permissible when supported by specific evidence and detailed findings, and the district court's findings in this case were
• Franklin & Marbin, P.A. v. Mascola
  711 So. 2d 46· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-03-18 ·cited 16×
  A law firm appeals the trial court's reduction of its hourly-rate fee agreement with a discharged client in a paternity case from $19,561 to $6,800. The court holds that absent a determination that the fee is illegal, prohibited, or clearly excessive under Florida Bar rules, the
• Baker Protective Servs. v. FP Inc. & Fid. & Deposit Co. of Md.
  659 So. 2d 1120· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-07-19 ·cited 16×
  Baker Protective Services appeals the denial of attorney's fees in a breach of contract action against FP Incorporated and surety Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland, while the defendants cross-appeal the denial of their sanctions. The court reverses as to FP Incorporated base
• Cheung v. Executive China Doral, Inc.
  638 So. 2d 82· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-03-08 ·cited 16×
  Three unemployment benefits claimants appealed attorneys' fee awards made by the Unemployment Appeals Commission, arguing the Commission failed to apply the lodestar method required by Florida law. The court vacated the fee awards and held that appellate attorneys' fees under Sec
• Grant v. George Schumann Tire & Battery Co.
  908 F.2d 874· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-10 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's attorney fee award and denied fees for appellate defense, finding the original award reasonable and the services for appeals unnecessary. The court also remanded for proper distribution of interest on a delayed refund.
• Islamic Ctr. OF Miss., Inc. v. City OF Starkville
  876 F.2d 465· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-30 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge believes that a particular attorney's customary billing rate should not be presumptively the appropriate hourly lodestar rate, requiring specific justification for deviations.
• In re Donovan
  877 F.2d 982· D.C. Cir.· 1989-06-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that Raymond J. Donovan is entitled to reimbursement for attorneys' fees and expenses because the Independent Counsel Act's procedural limitations prevented the Attorney General from following normal investigative procedures, thus satisfying the 'but for' requireme
• Daggett v. Kimmelman
  811 F.2d 793· 3d Cir.· 1987-02-12 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the district court's fee award for the pre-remedy phase and hourly rates, but remanded the remedy phase for further findings on whether time was spent on achieving population equality or political advantage.
• Bebchick v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Comm'n
  805 F.2d 396· D.C. Cir.· 1986-11-07 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the Commission's calculation of restitution, including interest, and awarded attorneys' fees under the common fund doctrine, allowing a lodestar enhancement.
• Peter Fabrics, Inc. v. S.S. "Hermes"
  765 F.2d 306· 2d Cir.· 1985-06-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that Massport could amend its pleadings to assert a counterclaim for indemnity under the contract, and that Italian Line was liable to indemnify Massport for defense costs, but fees incurred to establish the indemnity right itself were not recoverable.
• Easley v. Empire Inc. & Empiregas
  757 F.2d 923· 8th Cir.· 1985-03-20 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the judgments, finding no merit in the appellants' arguments regarding the directed verdict on the service letter issue, the applicability of a statutory amendment to punitive damages, the sufficiency of evidence for sex discrimination, or the excessiveness of
• Danny Kresky Enters. Corp. v. Magid
  716 F.2d 215· 3d Cir.· 1983-09-02 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in significantly reducing the requested attorney's fees and costs by arbitrarily disallowing travel time, trial preparation hours, and itemized costs without sufficient justification.
• Sierra Club v. Anne M. Gorsuch
  684 F.2d 972· D.C. Cir.· 1982-07-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a downward adjustment to the lodestar amount for attorneys' fees is appropriate when a litigant loses on every issue.
• Genser v. The Reef Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  100 So. 3d 760· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-11-07 ·cited 15×
  The Gensers appeal an order awarding attorney's fees and costs to the Reef Condominium Association after the Association prevailed in a dispute over the Gensers' violation of condominium rules. The appellate court reverses because the trial court failed to calculate the total jud
• Pinto v. Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd.
  513 F. Supp. 2d 1334· S.D. Fla.· 2007-02-16 ·cited 15×
  The court granted Class Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees and expenses, awarding 30% of the common fund, finding the requested amount reasonable based on various factors.
• Evans v. City OF Evanston
  941 F.2d 473· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-14 ·cited 15×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision regarding attorney's fees, finding no abuse of discretion in the reduction of hours, denial of fee enhancement, or refusal to award a share of the recovery.
• LEE v. Coahoma Cnty.
  937 F.2d 220· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-05 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the deputies' amended notice of appeal was timely filed under Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(3), and that certain rest breaks were compensable under FLSA § 7(k).
• LEE Cnty. v. Tohari
  582 So. 2d 104· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-06-28 ·cited 15×·via Lodestar Fee Calculation
  The court held that an order awarding attorney's fees must contain specific findings required by Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, including the number of hours reasonably expended and the reasonable hourly rate, and that the fee awarded cannot exceed the client agreem
• Martin v. Univ. OF S. Ala.
  911 F.2d 604· 11th Cir.· 1990-09-10 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred in rejecting the Special Master's findings on the reasonable hourly rate and the hours expended on post-judgment fee litigation, but correctly denied enhancement for post-judgment work.
• Leroy v. The City OF Houston
  906 F.2d 1068· 5th Cir.· 1990-07-30 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred in awarding interest from a date prior to the mandate and in including expenses that were part of a vacated judgment, but did not err in awarding attorneys' fees for services rendered after the prior mandate.
• In re Olson
  884 F.2d 1415· D.C. Cir.· 1989-09-08 ·cited 15×
  The court held that attorneys' fees incurred during the preliminary investigation by the Department of Justice are not compensable under the Ethics in Government Act, but fees incurred during the Independent Counsel's investigation, particularly those related to opposing expanded
• Wells v. Bowen
  855 F.2d 37· 2d Cir.· 1988-08-09 ·cited 15×
  The court held that attorneys can seek fees under both the Social Security Act (SSA) and the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), and that SSA fees may be enhanced to reflect the risks of contingent fee arrangements, unlike EAJA fees. The court also clarified that bad faith fees u
• Jones v. Amalgamated Warbasse Houses, Inc.
  721 F.2d 881· 2d Cir.· 1983-11-14 ·cited 15×
  A district court has broad discretion to modify attorneys' fees in a settlement, even if negotiated at arm's length, and is not bound by the parties' agreement if it finds good reason to reduce the award.
• Tiara Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Marsh USA, Inc.
  697 F. Supp. 2d 1349· S.D. Fla.· 2010-03-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a defendant is entitled to attorneys' fees and costs under Florida's offer of judgment statute when a judgment of no liability is entered, even if the offer lacked a certificate of service and was nominal, provided it was made in good faith.
• James v. Wash Depot Holdings, Inc.
  489 F. Supp. 2d 1341· S.D. Fla.· 2007-05-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while a prevailing plaintiff under the FLSA is entitled to attorney's fees, the amount must be reduced to reflect the limited success and inadequate billing practices.
• First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of the Palm Beaches v. Bezotte
  740 So. 2d 589· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-08-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the lodestar calculation for attorney's fees was proper, the application of a contingency multiplier was not permissible under federal law for TILA claims.
• Harvard Farms, Inc. v. Nat'l Cas. Co.
  617 So. 2d 400· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-04-20 ·cited 14×
  The trial court erred in refusing to consider a risk multiplier for attorney's fees based on an oral contingency fee agreement, as the Rules of Professional Conduct do not create a basis for civil liability.
• Spaulding v. Albertson's, Inc.
  610 So. 2d 721· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-12-29 ·cited 14×
  A workers' compensation claimant appeals a judge of compensation claims' determination of appellate attorney's fees, challenging both the methodology for calculating the fee amount and the date from which interest should accrue. The court reverses the fee calculation but affirms
• Hendrickson v. Branstad
  934 F.2d 158· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the plaintiff was a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees, the district court erred in granting a twenty-five percent enhancement based on the results achieved and the contingent nature of the case, as these factors were already reflected in the l
• Phillips v. Gen. Servs. Admin.
  924 F.2d 1577· Fed. Cir.· 1991-02-07 ·cited 14×
  The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) lacks jurisdiction to award attorney fees for services rendered in federal court, and attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) are capped at $75 per hour, with contingency arrangements not qualifying as a 'special factor
• Associated Builders & Contractors OF La., Inc. v. The Orleans Parish Sch. Bd.
  919 F.2d 374· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff was a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in calculating the award or in considering the timeliness of the request.
• Kelly v. Matlack, Inc.
  903 F.2d 978· 3d Cir.· 1990-05-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the jury's finding of willfulness supporting liquidated damages was supported by sufficient evidence, and the trial court did not err in denying the motion for JNOV.
• Alberti v. Klevenhagen
  896 F.2d 927· 5th Cir.· 1990-03-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in accepting all claimed hours without specific findings on reasonableness and in applying certain enhancements to the fee award, but affirmed the compensation for delay in payment.
• Blum v. Witco Chem. Corp.
  888 F.2d 975· 3d Cir.· 1989-10-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in awarding a contingency multiplier by misapplying legal standards regarding market analysis, focusing on individual case risk, failing to establish a market-wide standard, and awarding the multiplier without sufficient market evidenc
• Chem. Mfrs. Ass'n v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency
  885 F.2d 1276· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-13 ·cited 14×
  The NRDC is entitled to attorney's fees for work on two issues where it prevailed against the EPA, but not for work on an issue where it prevailed only against a common adversary. The court also awarded expenses and determined reasonable hourly rates and hours expended.
• KIM v. Fujikawa
  871 F.2d 1427· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-29 ·cited 14×
  A breaching fiduciary bears the burden of proving what portion of a prohibited transaction did not result in a loss to the plan; ERISA does not provide a right of contribution among fiduciaries.
• Starr v. Otis R. Bowen, M.D.
  831 F.2d 872· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by awarding attorney's fees without sufficient findings to support the reasonableness of the amount granted.
• Lowry v. Lowry
  512 So. 2d 1142· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-09-24 ·cited 14×
  In this alimony modification case, the Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of Alexander Lowry's petition to modify permanent alimony payments, based on estoppel and the failure to establish a de facto marriage between his ex-wife and her boyfriend.
• Aubin v. Fudala
  821 F.2d 45· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees, as it properly found an interconnection between the state tort and federal civil rights claims.
• Shaw v. Library OF Congress
  747 F.2d 1469· D.C. Cir.· 1984-11-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the statutory phrase "the same as a private person" in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(k) does not constitute a clear waiver of sovereign immunity for pre-judgment interest on attorney's fees awarded under Title VII. The dissent argues that the district court's calculatio
• 22ND Century Props., LLC v. FPH Props., LLC
  160 So. 3d 135· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-04-01 ·cited 13×
  In this fraud case arising from a real estate venture, FPH Properties obtained a judgment exceeding $1.5 million against 22nd Century Properties and its principal Damerau for falsifying documents and misappropriating profits. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's award o
• Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank v. Sandel
  766 So. 2d 302· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-03-01 ·cited 13×
  Citibank appeals an order awarding attorney's fees in a Truth-in-Lending Act case, challenging both the lodestar calculation and hourly rate. The Fourth District affirms the trial court's fee award and additionally grants the Sandels' motion for attorney's fees on appeal, holding
• Trans World Tire Co. & Transp. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Hagness
  651 So. 2d 124· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-02-09 ·cited 13×·via Lodestar Calculation
  The appellate court affirmed a workers' compensation order awarding an attorney's fee. The judge of compensation claims (JCC) departed downward from the statutory guideline fee, awarding $35,000 instead of the calculated $45,610.53, solely because the guideline fee resulted in a
• Dutchak v. Central States
  932 F.2d 591· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-19 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court did not err in approving a fee multiplier of two and in its calculation of the lodestar figure, affirming the award of attorney's fees.
• Chambless v. Masters
  885 F.2d 1053· 2d Cir.· 1989-09-12 ·cited 13×·via Lodestar Analysis
  The court held that the district court's award of actuarially-adjusted benefits was the functional equivalent of prohibited retroactive benefits, and affirmed the district court's attorney fee award, except for paraprofessional services which require further consideration.
• Bell v. United Princeton Props., Inc.
  884 F.2d 713· 3d Cir.· 1989-09-05 ·cited 13×
  A party challenging a fee petition must raise specific grounds in briefs or affidavits, but need not challenge each individual time entry if categories of work are identified. Reductions based on issues not raised by the opposing party are improper.
• Gilmere v. City OF Atlanta
  864 F.2d 734· 11th Cir.· 1989-01-30 ·cited 13×·via Lodestar Amount
  The court held that in a § 1983 wrongful death case, federal courts must apply state law for damages unless inconsistent with federal law, and the district court's award was inadequate.
• McDONALD v. Armontrout
  860 F.2d 1456· 8th Cir.· 1988-11-09 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney fees, affirming the hourly rates, compensation for monitoring, and inclusion of habeas corpus work.